Oh My Sweet...LORD!
Oh, Jesus H. Christ, how I wish this was only a joke, but it's apparently not:
The sort of guilt-by-association that comes by this must do more to motivate a believer to single-handedly dismiss Christianity, sheerly out of a desire to dissociate from such a travesty, than all the horrors of the Dark and Middle Ages combined.
HT: Pandagon
________________
Technorati tags: Godidiots
20 comments:
ROFLMAO. Thanks for posting this. What a great laugh.
I mean, it's also pathetic, but really snortingly funny.
wow.
I'm particularly fond of the pillow of faith.
beyond that, i'm speechless.
Well, I admit it does not have the cache of the invisible unicorn game, but I liked dressing up in pretend armor as a kid. That usually took the form of a trash can lid and a pot on the head.
For people who like to talk about what active Christians you were, you seem surprised by a lot. Toy faith armor has been around for quite a while. You can't go into a Christian bookstore without seeing a set.
"For people who like to talk about what active Christians you were, you seem surprised by a lot. Toy faith armor has been around for quite a while. You can't go into a Christian bookstore without seeing a set."
Yes, but it's just so bizarre and over-the-top, not to mention reminiscent of the dark ages when innocent masses of dissenting believers had swords run through them for speaking their minds. It's, it's just unreal. goofy, and sadly funny! LOL!!
(JH)
You can't go into a Christian bookstore without seeing a set.
Well, I guess that explains why I have never seen anything like this before in my life.
reminiscent of the dark ages when innocent masses of dissenting believers had swords run through them for speaking their minds
Not for most people familiar with the passage.
I;m just curious why they chose the English flag.
My wife's hypothesis is that someone somewhere had a lot of unsold knight costumes.
Stuff like this is what causes me to liken modern Christianity to Pokemon. The spiritual depth is about the same, and the merchandising can't be beat.
I think someone saw an opportunity to make a little money selling silly outfits and what not to people dumb enough to buy it. Purely a business decision.
Let's just hope these poor kids don't test god's armor by shooting each with dad's 9mm semi-auto. They might find out the hard way that jesus doesn't always have your back.
Also note that the mother used "god's armor" to help aleviate her daughter's fear of the dark. She replaced an irrational fear with an imaginary solution.
Why not just tell her that monsters, boogey-men, and ghosts aren't real. But then I guess her daughter might ask (as children will often do) why god is real since we can't see him either.
I can see these being hilarious Halloween costumes.
Unfortunately this merchandise doesn't surprise me. It's a sad commentary on the spiritual depth of many professing Christians and churches today. This kind of marketing is misguided to say the least. Would to God that there was more emphasis on the reality of wearing God's spiritual armor as outlined in Ephesians 6, instead of this silly marketing ploy...
Daniel,
I know this is your site and all, but I don't appreciate you taking the Lord's name in vain in your post. I know I don't have to come here, but if you want Christians to comment and interact with you guys, you should refrain from this. Anyway, just my 2 cents...
S&BL,
Thanks for your $0.02.
Basically, we try to be civil and polite in general, but I am not under the same obligation that you are (1 Cor 10:29). We aren't overly offensive, or at least we certainly don't try to be. However, we cannot and should not begin to accomodate those we don't agree with just to meet their criteria for "unoffensiveness".
It would be akin to me telling you that when you say I'm hellbound, it offends me, so stop saying it. I wouldn't ask that of you, and if I did, you certainly wouldn't comply.
If what we say offends you, don't come back. Sorry.
Daniel,
Thanks for your reply. 1 Cor. 10:29 is in reference to Christians liberty though, so it really doesn't support your assertion. If I didn't go where people said things that offend me, I wouldn't leave the house. Usually the Lord's name is thrown around in this world like any curse word, and when it is so denigrated it offends me. Anyway, I felt at liberty to let you know about it. I've found you to be mostly congenial otherwise, and at least an intelligent proponent of your worldview....thanks
S&BL,
Thank you.
You may have misunderstood why I quoted the relevant passage. I did so to point out that you are under an obligation to have your freedom judged by my own conscience, because you are a believer, while it is not a reciprocal function, because I do not believe and do not care whether you do or not.
Hope that clarifies why I said you were under an obligation that I wasn't, and then cited the verse.
S&BL,
A point; with which you will probably agree.
The above site that Daniel has shared, i.e., merchandizing the things "of God" would probably serve as the greater example of "taking the Lords name in vain." A Christian assumes the name of the Lord and by so doing can subject that name to ridicule simply by their actions and attitudes. When it comes to taking the Lords name in vain, the church is the biggest offender because they actually believe in the Name. They do some pretty wacky things and attribute them to God as His "disciples." I don't think most here are really addressing God (they don't claim to know of a God that they could address Him), but rather, they address those who hold evangelical notions of God.
Daniel,
My obligation is to try to avoid what you would perceive to be sinful when you know that I'm a Christian. For example, eating meat that is sacrificed to idols is not wrong in and of itself, because an idol is nothing in and of itself. But to someone who worships an idol as if it was a god, that is not so. If I was invited to dinner by an idolator, and he told me our steak had been sacrificed to his god, I would be causing him to stumble because I would be entering into his idolatry by partaking in the meal. If I didn't know it had been sacrificed to an idol, no harm done. Anyway, I see the point you were making. I didn't necessarily expect you as an atheist to honor my request, but I made it regardless of my expectation. Thanks...
Paul,
I would say that at best the little armor stuff is naive and misguided, at worst it's another company taking advantage of the "christian" market. I agree with your main point though. However, when God's name is being used He is being addressed. If He is not really being addressed and His name is used, it is in vain. Not believing in God doesn't change this. I understand what you're getting at though...
S&BL
This is stupid
The idea of walking around in armor doesn't seem like a very friendly way to view one's life and interactions with others. It sounds kind of defensive.
Reminds me a little bit of the street preacher Barry Weaver who told his daughter all about the fires of hell till she cried herself to sleep for a week, and then offered her "Jesus" the "antidote" only after he'd drilled into her head the fear of eternal hell.
Though of course, jammies aside, Christian kitsche is so omnipresent it's like Christianity has been kitsched by Satan.
Post a Comment